| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20091012100926.GA15777@elte.hu> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:09:26 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> Cc: Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>, swhiteho@...hat.com, cluster-devel@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: move gfs2 tracepoints to inclue/trace/events dir * Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 12:01:16PM -0400, Jason Baron wrote: > > hi, > > > > I'd like to move the gfs2 tracepoints to the the common > > include/trace/events directory along with all of the other trace events. > > It makes understanding what tracepoints are available easier, and I see > > no reason why gfs2 should be different. For example, 'ext4.h' is already > > in the include/trace/events directory. > > Folks, no. Drivers and filesystems should be as self-contained as > possible. include/trace/ is an extremly bad idea for everything > that's not actually global kernel functionality. There's a reason all > other fs headers have moved out of include/linux, too. Tracing is special though - having global visibility of different tracepoints in one place helps keeping the set of tracepoints more consistent. Self-contained tracepoints are fine too, but only as a second-tier choice for out-of-tree code or for subsystems that prefer that. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists